[Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures for FACTS I Data Verification.]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Report No. X-IN-MOA-0081-2003

Title: Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures for FACTS I Data Verification.

  

Date: February 10, 2004

****************************************DISCLAIMER***************************** 
This file contains an ASCII representation of an OIG report. No attempt has been made to display graphic images or illustrations. Some tables may be included, but may not resemble those in the printed version. A printed copy of this report may be obtained by referring to the PDF file or by calling the Office of Inspector General, Division of Acquisition and Management Operations at (202) 219-3841.
*******************************************************************************

Subject: Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures for FACTS I Data Verification. (No. X-IN-MOA-0081-2003)

 U.S. General Accounting Office
441 G. Street, NW Room 5970
Washington, DC 20548

Department of Treasury
Attn: Director, Financial Reports Division
Financial Management Services
Room 500B
3700 East-West Highway
Hyattsville, MD 20782


Dear Sir or Madam:

      Enclosed is the report for the Department of the Interior on  ï¿½Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures for FACTS I Data Verification.ï¿½  This report is required by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin 01-02, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements. The report was prepared by KPMG LLP (KPMG) under contract with the Department of the Interior, Office of Inspector General.  The contract required that the audit be performed in accordance with United States generally accepted government auditing standards, OMB Bulletinï¿½01-02 and the General Accounting Office /Presidentï¿½s Council on Integrity and Efficiency Financial Audit Manual.
      
      KPMG is responsible for the report and for the conclusions expressed in the report.           If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at (202) 2085512 or Mr. Curtis Crider, Director of Financial Audits, at (202) 208-5724  


						Sincerely,


						Roger La Rouche
						Assistant Inspector General 
         for Audits
      
Enclosure

Independent Accountantsï¿½ Report on Applying Agreed-upon Procedures
for FACTS I Data Verification
Office of Inspector General, 
U.S. Department of the Interior:
We have performed the procedures enumerated in Exhibit A (attached), which were stated in the U.S. Department of the Treasuryï¿½s (Treasury) Federal Agenciesï¿½ Centralized Trial Balance System (FACTS) guidance dated August 5, 2003, to assist the U.S. Department of the Interiorï¿½s (Department) Office of Inspector General (OIG) in evaluating the Departmentï¿½s assertion that it compared the summarized FACTSï¿½I data to the related information in the Departmentï¿½s consolidated audited financial statements as of and for the year ended September 30, 2003.  The Departmentï¿½s management is responsible for the proper accounting, presentation, and reporting of its consolidated financial statements and reporting of information to Treasury.  
This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  These procedures were agreed to by, and the sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the U.S. Treasury Financial Management Service (FMS), and the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO).  Consequently, we make no representations regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described in Exhibit A either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose.  The procedures we performed and our associated findings are presented in Exhibit A. 
We were not engaged to, and did not, conduct an examination of the FACTS I data submission, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on such information.  Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.  Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Department, OIG, OMB, FMS, and GAO, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.

February 5, 2004

Procedures and Findings1
1. The amounts for split U.S. Government Standard General Ledger (SGL) accounts in the Departmentï¿½s accounting records must agree to the corresponding amounts on the Split Account Schedule ï¿½ FY2003, presented in Attachment 1, prepared by the U.S. Department of the Interior (Department) Chief Financial Officer (CFO).  We compared the amounts in the Departmentï¿½s trial balance, audited statement of custodial activities, or elimination entry to the corresponding amounts for each line item on the Split Account Schedule ï¿½ FY2003.  
Findings: We found such amounts to be in agreement, except as follows:
Split Account Schedule
Trial Balance
Difference
Explanation
1990F
(67,664.49)
199A.G
       3,530,670.85
 (3,598,335.34)
A
5900FT
     3,056.12
590N.G
              7,291.74
         (4,235.62)
A
A5900FX
45,310,340.73
590E.G
     56,567,114.56
(11,256,773.83)
B
A5900N.X
456,032,032.10
590E.N
   451,005,866.86
   5,026,165.24 
A
A5310FX
34,443,145.06
531E.G
     34,463,725.73
 (20,580.67)
A
S5900N.X
(103,673,161.64)
5909R.N
(96,196,784.11)
7,476,377.53
A
We communicated the differences noted above to the Department and requested explanations for the differences.  We received the following explanations from the Department:
A. The Department indicated that they believe the difference is immaterial.
B. The Department indicated that the elimination entry for general ledger account 5900 was applied to non-exchange revenue, however, a portion of this entry related to exchange revenue.
No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanations as to the reasons for the differences.
2. The amounts for each line item in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated balance sheet and audited consolidated statement of changes in net position must agree to the corresponding amounts in the AGW columns titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ presented in Attachment 2, and ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statements Cumulative Results of Operationsï¿½ and ï¿½Agency Financial Statements Unexpended Appropriationsï¿½ presented in Attachment 3, provided by the CFO.  We compared the amounts for each line item in the audited consolidated balance sheet and the audited consolidated statement of changes in net position to the corresponding amounts in the AGW balance sheet column titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ and the AGW statement of changes in net position columns titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statements Cumulative Results of Operationsï¿½ and ï¿½Agency Financial Statements Unexpended Appropriations.ï¿½  
Findings:  We found amounts to be in agreement, except as follows: 
Line Item
AGW ï¿½ Balance Sheet
Audited Consolidated Balance Sheet
Difference
Explanation
Public Assets




Other Assets 
197,846,000 
           201,544,000 
       (3,698,000)
A
Total Assets
53,962,805,000
53,966,403,000
(3,598,000)
A
Public Liabilities




Total ï¿½ Custodial Liability
       35,992,000 
ï¿½
       35,992,000 
B
Total ï¿½ Other Liabilities
  1,305,365,000 
        1,341,356,000 
     (35,991,000)
B
We communicated the differences noted in the table above to the Department and requested explanations for the differences.  We received the following explanations from the Department:
A. The Department indicated that they believe the difference is immaterial.
B. The Department indicated that Treasury classifies certain Treasury Fund Symbols as custodial liabilities that the Department has presented as other liabilities.  The Department indicated that the remaining difference of $1,000 is a result of rounding.
No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanations as to the reasons for the differences.
3. The amounts for each line item on the AGW balance sheet for the column titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ presented in Attachment 2, and the AGW statement of changes in net position for the columns titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statements Cumulative Results of Operationsï¿½ and ï¿½Agency Financial Statements Unexpended Appropriationsï¿½ presented in Attachment 3, prepared by the CFO, must agree to the corresponding amounts in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated balance sheet and audited consolidated statement of changes in net position.  We compared the amounts for each line item on the AGW balance sheet for the column titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ and the AGW statement of changes in net position for the columns titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statements Cumulative Results of Operationsï¿½ and ï¿½Agency Financial Statements Unexpended Appropriationsï¿½ to the corresponding amounts in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated balance sheet and audited consolidated statement of changes in net position.  
Findings:  No differences were noted other than the differences described above in the findings for procedure No. 2.
4. The column on the AGW balance sheet titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statements,ï¿½ presented in Attachment 2, and the columns on the AGW statement of changes in net position columns titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statements Cumulative Results of Operationsï¿½ and ï¿½Agency Financial Statements Unexpended Appropriationsï¿½ presented in Attachment 3, must be arithmetically correct.  The column titled ï¿½Differencesï¿½ on the AGW balance sheet, presented in Attachment 2, and the columns titled ï¿½Differencesï¿½ on the AGW statement of changes in net position, presented in Attachment 3, must be arithmetically correct.  We totaled the subcaptions within the AGW balance sheet column titled  ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ and AGW statement of changes in net position columns titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statement Cumulative Results of Operationsï¿½ and ï¿½Agency Financial Statements Unexpended Appropriations.ï¿½  We also totaled the subcaptions and cross-totaled the captions within the AGW balance sheet column titled ï¿½Differencesï¿½ and AGW statement of changes in net position columns titled ï¿½Differences.ï¿½
Findings: The calculated amounts agreed to the caption and subcaption totals within the ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ and the ï¿½Differencesï¿½ columns presented on the AGW balance sheet as well as within the ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statements Cumulative Results of Operations,ï¿½ ï¿½Agency Financial Statements Unexpended Appropriations,ï¿½ and the ï¿½Differencesï¿½ columns presented on the AGW statement of changes in net position, except as follows:
A. The calculated amount did not agree to the amount in the subcaption titled ï¿½Subtotal Prior Period Adjustmentï¿½ within the ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ column for Cumulative Results of Operations on the AGW statement of changes in net position.
B. The calculated amount did not agree to the amount in the subcaption titled ï¿½Subtotal Prior Period Adjustmentï¿½ in the ï¿½Differencesï¿½ column for Cumulative Results of Operations on the AGW statement of changes in net position.
C. The calculated amount did not agree to the amount in the subcaption titled ï¿½Subtotal Prior Period Adjustmentï¿½ in the ï¿½Amount from Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ column for Unexpended Appropriations on the AGW statement of changes in net position.
D. The calculated amount did not agree to the amount in the subcaption titled ï¿½Subtotal Prior Period Adjustmentï¿½ in the ï¿½Differencesï¿½ column for Unexpended Appropriations on the AGW statement of changes in net position
E. The calculated amount did not agree to the amount in the subcaption titled ï¿½Subtotal Beginning Balancesï¿½ in the ï¿½Differencesï¿½ column for Unexpended Appropriations on the AGW statement of changes in net position.
F. The calculated amount did not agree to the amount in the caption titled ï¿½Other Budgetary Financing Sources and Adjustmentsï¿½ in the ï¿½Differencesï¿½ column of the Unexpended Appropriations section on the AGW statement of changes in net position.

We communicated the differences noted above to the Department and requested explanations for the differences.  We received the following explanations from the Department:
A-D.	The Department indicated that the difference is a result of the Department entering amounts as a subtotal rather than at the detail level.
E-F.	The Department indicated that the difference is a result of the spreadsheet not calculating the amount. The Department also indicated that they could not change the spreadsheet to calculate the amount because the spreadsheet is password protected. 
No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanations as to the reasons for the differences.
5. Any differences identified for the AGW balance sheet, presented in Attachment 2, and AGW statement of changes in net position, presented in Attachment 3, must be explained by the CFO, and the explanations should be compared to supporting documentation for consistency.  We read Attachments 2 and 3 to identify any differences for the AGW balance sheet and AGW statement of changes in net position and requested explanations and supporting documentation for those differences from the CFO.  
Findings: We determined that the line item amounts labeled as ï¿½Differencesï¿½ on the AGW balance sheet and as ï¿½Differencesï¿½ and ï¿½Differencesï¿½ on the AGW statement of changes in net position were explained by the CFO, except for those line items noted below.  As a result, we did not compare explanations to supporting documentation for the items noted below.
Financial Statement Line Item
Difference
Explanation
Balance Sheet


TOTAL ASSETS
(3,597,745.88)
A




Intragovernmental Liabilities


Total Intragovernmental Liabilities
6,433,694.60
A
Public Liabilities



Total Accounts Payable
            (2,298.64)
B




Statement of Changes in Net Position



Cumulative Results of Operations



Beginning Balances
     (2,252,400.10)
B

Beginning Balances, as Adjusted
     (2,251,675.68)
B

Budgetary Financing Sources



Other Non-Exchange Revenue
       (296,414.42)
B

Other Financing Sources



Total Financing Sources
(243,175,173.03)
A

Total Net Cost of Operations
   (11,258,325.71)
A

Ending Balance
(234,168,523.00)
A
We communicated the differences noted in the table above to the Department and requested explanations for the differences.  We received the following explanations from the Department:
A. The Department indicated that these differences represent totals and are a combination of the explained differences.
B. The Department indicated that they believe the difference is immaterial.
No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanation as to the reasons for the ï¿½Differences.ï¿½
We compared explanations for the differences noted in the table below, to supporting documentation as described in the respective comments below.
Financial Statement Line Item
Difference
Comment
Balance Sheet


Intragovernmental Assets



 Accounts Receivable
        (152,569.51)
A
Total Intragovernmental Assets
(153,035.70)
A
Public Assets



Accounts and Interest Receivable, Net
     (3,444,646.63)
A
Intragovernmental Liabilities



Accounts Payable
       6,433,488.71 
A
Public Liabilities



Total Accrued Payroll and Benefits
     (6,433,067.92)
A




Statement of Changes in Net Position



Cumulative Results of Operations



Budgetary Financing Sources



Royalties Retained
 (245,430,443.24)
B

Transfers In/Out without Reimbursement
       1,353,821.12 
C

Other Budgetary Financing Sources and Adjustments
       1,691,995.44 
C

Other Financing Sources



Imputed Financing from Financing Absorbed from Others
              1,645.57 
C

Transfers In/Out without Reimbursement
        (796,923.78)
C

Other
          300,157.38 
C

Unexpended Appropriations



Beginning Balances
        (460,056.64)
C

Beginning Balances, as adjusted
        (460,781.06)
C

Other Financing Sources



Total Financing Sources
461,113,51
C
A. We compared the difference to the Departmentï¿½s financial statement elimination adjustment and noted that the difference did not agree to the elimination adjustment as the elimination adjustment included additional amounts.  However, the Department indicated that they believe the difference is immaterial.
B. We compared the difference to the final audited trial balance report and noted an unexplained difference of $1,843,743.
C. We did not compare the explanation for this difference to supporting documentation because we did not receive supporting documentation from the Department.  However, the Department indicated that they believe the difference is immaterial.
No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanation as to the reasons for the ï¿½Differences.ï¿½
6. If there is an amount labeled as ï¿½Differencesï¿½ on the ending balance line at the bottom of the AGW statement of changes in net position, presented in Attachment 3, the explanation for the difference must be identified by the CFO and supported by appropriate documentation.  We obtained the AGW statement of changes in net position and determined if there was an amount labeled as ï¿½Differencesï¿½ on the ending balance line, and if so, we requested explanations and supporting documentation for those differences from the CFO.
Findings: We determined that the CFO did not provide an explanation for the amount labeled as ï¿½Differenceï¿½ on the AGW statement of changes in net position - ending balance line.  We communicated this difference to the Department and requested an explanation and supporting documentation for the difference.  The Department indicated that the difference is explained on the ï¿½Total Net Positionï¿½ line and resulted because of an incorrect sign on an amount in the Treasury column that the Department is unable to change and elimination entry for general ledger account 5900 that was applied to non-exchange revenue; however, a portion of this entry related to exchange revenue.  We did not compare the explanation to supporting documentation because we did not receive any supporting documentation.
7. The amounts for each line item for agency gross cost, agency exchange revenue, and net cost by Budget Function Classification (BFC), from the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes must agree to the corresponding amounts in the statement of net cost columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Amount From Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ provided by the CFO, presented in Attachment 4.  We compared amounts for each line item for agency gross cost, agency exchange revenue, and net cost by BFC from the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes to the corresponding amounts in the statement of net cost columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Amount From Agency Financial Statements.ï¿½   
Findings: Net cost by BFC is not included in the statement of net cost; therefore, we were unable to compare these amounts from the audited consolidated financial statement footnotes to the statement of net cost.  We found such amounts for agency gross cost and agency exchange revenue by BFC to be in agreement.
8. The amounts for each line for agency gross cost, agency exchange revenue, and net cost, by BFC on the statement of net cost for the columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Amount From Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ provided by the CFO, presented in Attachment 4, must agree to the corresponding amounts in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statements footnotes.  We compared the amounts for each line for agency gross cost, agency exchange revenue, and net cost, by BFC, on the statement of net cost for the columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Amount From Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ to the corresponding amounts in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes.  
Findings: Net cost by BFC is not included in the statement of net cost; therefore, we were unable to compare these amounts from the audited consolidated financial statement footnotes to the statement of net cost.  We found such amounts for agency gross cost and agency exchange revenue by BFC to be in agreement.
9. The amounts for each line item in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes for intragovernmental agency gross cost and agency exchange revenue, by BFC, must agree to the corresponding amounts in the statement of net cost column titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotes,ï¿½ in the sections titled ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Net Costï¿½ and ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Exchange Revenueï¿½ provided by the CFO, presented in Attachment 4.  We compared the amounts for each line item in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes for intragovernmental agency gross cost and agency exchange revenue, by BFC, to the corresponding amounts in the column titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotes,ï¿½ in the sections titled ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Net Costï¿½ and ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Exchange Revenue,ï¿½ of the statement of net cost.
Findings: We were unable to perform the above procedures relating to intragovernmental agency gross cost and agency exchange revenue by BFC because the Department did not complete the sections titled ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Net Costï¿½ and ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Exchange Revenueï¿½ on the statement of net cost. The Department indicated that they did not complete these sections because Treasury did not populate these sections.  No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanation.
10. The amounts for each line item for agency gross cost and agency exchange revenue, in the sections titled ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Net Costï¿½ and ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Exchange Revenueï¿½ by BFC, from the statement of net cost column titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ provided by the CFO, presented in Attachment 4, must agree to the corresponding amounts in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes.  We compared the amounts for each line item for agency gross cost and agency exchange revenue, in the sections titled ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Net Costï¿½ and ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Exchange Revenueï¿½ by BFC, from the statement of net cost column titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ to the corresponding amounts in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes.  No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanation.
Findings: We were unable to perform the above procedures relating to intragovernmental agency gross cost and agency exchange revenue by BFC because the Department did not complete the sections titled ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Net Costï¿½ and ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Exchange Revenueï¿½ on the statement of net cost. The Department indicated that they did not complete these sections because Treasury did not populate these sections.
11. The amounts for total agency gross cost, total agency exchange revenue, and total net cost from the statement of net cost columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Amount From Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ provided by the CFO, presented in Attachment 4, must agree to the corresponding amounts in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes.  We compared the amounts for total agency gross cost, total agency exchange revenue, and total net cost from the statement of net cost columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Amount From Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ to the corresponding amounts in the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes.
Findings: We found such amounts to be in agreement.
12. The amounts for total agency gross cost, total agency exchange revenue, and total net cost from the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes must agree to the corresponding amounts on the statement of net cost columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Amount From Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ provided by the CFO, presented in Attachment 4.  We compared the amounts for total agency gross cost, total agency exchange revenue, and total net cost from the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes to the corresponding amounts in the statement of net cost columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Amount From Agency Financial Statements.ï¿½
Findings: We found such amounts to be in agreement.
13. The statement of net cost columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotes,ï¿½ ï¿½Amount From Agency Financial Statements,ï¿½ and ï¿½Differenceï¿½ presented in Attachment 4, must be arithmetically correct.  We totaled total agency gross cost, total agency exchange revenue, total interdepartmental agency gross costs, total interdepartmental agency exchange revenue, and total net cost on the statement of net cost columns titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Agency Financial Statements.ï¿½ We totaled and cross-totaled the statement of net cost column titled ï¿½Difference.ï¿½ 
Findings:  The calculated amounts agreed to the totals in the ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotesï¿½ or ï¿½Agency Financial Statementsï¿½ columns and the totals and cross-totals in the ï¿½Differencesï¿½ column for total agency gross cost, total agency exchange revenue, and total net cost on the statement of net cost.  
We were unable to perform the above procedures relating to intragovernmental agency gross cost and agency exchange revenue by BFC because the Department did not complete the sections titled ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Net Costï¿½ and ï¿½Interdepartmental Amounts Included in Agency Exchange Revenueï¿½ on the statement of net cost. The Department indicated that they did not complete these sections because Treasury did not populate these sections.  No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanation.
14. Any differences identified on the statement of net cost must be explained by the CFO, and the explanations should be compared to supporting documentation for consistency.  We inspected the statement of net cost for any differences between each line item for total agency gross cost, total agency exchange revenue, and total net cost from the Departmentï¿½s audited consolidated financial statement footnotes and the corresponding amounts in the statement of net cost column titled ï¿½Agency Statement Footnotes,ï¿½ and requested explanations and supporting documentation for those differences from the CFO.   
Findings:  We determined that the amounts labeled as ï¿½Differenceï¿½ on the statement of net cost were explained by the CFO, except for the differences noted in the table below.  As a result, we did not compare explanations to supporting documentation for the items noted in the table below.
BFS
Amount
Agency Gross Cost

300
$ (44,720,240)
450 
$      2,896,475
800 
$      (915,592)
Agency Exchange Revenue 
300 
$ (43,730,707)
800
$      8,347,719
950
$ (90,011,901)
Agency Net Cost 
Total
$ (4,641,914,497.83)
For the differences with explanations, we compared the explanations on the statement of net cost to an analysis of the Departmentï¿½s and Treasuryï¿½s computation of interdepartmental eliminations for consistency.  No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s representations as to the reasons for the differences.
15. The amounts for each respective line item in the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule for the Departmentï¿½s consolidated financial statement footnotes, or other supporting data, must agree to the corresponding amounts on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule column titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Data,ï¿½ presented in Attachment 5.  We compared the amounts for each respective line item on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule from the Departmentï¿½s consolidated financial statement footnotes, or other supporting data indicated in the column titled ï¿½Agency Source Dataï¿½ on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule, to the corresponding amounts on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule column titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Data.ï¿½  
Findings:  We found such amounts to be in agreement, except as follows:
A. Amount listed in the column, ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Data,ï¿½ was not presented in the source listed in the ï¿½Agency Source Dataï¿½ column for the following line items:
1. Note 5 (Plan, Property & Equipment), Line 11, Columns (2), (3), and (4)
2. Note 12 (Costs of Stewardship Land) Acquired in the Current Fiscal Year, Section A: Heritage Natural Assets, Heritage Cultural Assets, and Total Cost of Assets
3. Note 17 (Other Items), Section C, Other Assets, Line 6, and Section I, Other Losses, Line 6
4. Note 19 (Commitments and Contingencies), Section B, Unexpended Obligations, Line 21, Columns (2), (3), and (4)
We communicated the differences noted above to the Department and requested explanations for the differences.  We received the following explanations from the Department:
1. The Department indicated that correct source is Note 8 rather than Note 5.
2. The Department indicated that correct source is Note 20 rather than Note 21.
3. The Department indicated that correct source is the trial balance report for Section C, Other Assets, Line 6 and Note 18 for Section I, Other Losses, Line 6 for rather than Notes 10 and 21, respectively.
4. The Department indicated that correct source is the trial balance report rather than the FACTS ATB Report.
No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanations for the differences.
B. Amount listed in the column, ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Data,ï¿½ did not agree to the amount in the source referenced in the ï¿½Agency Source Dataï¿½ column for the following line items:
Line Item
FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule
Agency Source Data
Difference
Explanation
Note 10 (Federal Debt Securities), Section F: Agency Investment in Federal Debt Securities
Line 21, Column (2)
5,607,838,360.07
5,611,387,000.00
(3,548,639.93)
1
Note 16 (Deferred Maintenance), Section A
Buildings, Structures and Facilities - Low
6,679,236.00
6,679,236,000.00
(6,672,556,764.00)
2
Buildings, Structures and Facilities ï¿½ High
11,262,922.00
11,262,922,000.00
(11,251,659,078.00)
2
Note 16 (Deferred Maintenance), Section A
Total Deferred Maintenance on General PP&E ï¿½ Low
6,679,236.00
6,679,236,000.00
(6,672,556,764.00)
2
Total Deferred Maintenance on General PP&E ï¿½ Low
11,262,922.00
11,262,922,000.00
(11,251,659,078.00)
2
Note 16 (Deferred Maintenance), Section C: Heritage Assets
Line 10, Columns (2) and (3)
748,886.00
748,886,000.00
(748,117,134.00)
2
Line 10, Columns (2) and (3)
1,558,896.00
1,558,896,000.00
(1,5557,337.104.00)
2
We communicated the differences noted in the table above to the Department and requested explanations for the differences.  We received the following explanations from the Department:
1. The Department indicated that the difference is a result of the Department entering the net investment cost rather than the investment cost.
2. The Department indicated that the difference is a result of the Department entering the amounts rounded to the nearest thousand in the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule, rather than in whole dollars.
No additional procedures were performed with respect to managementï¿½s explanations for the differences.
C. We did not compare the amount on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule to the amount from agency source data for the line item, Note 19 (Commitments and Contingencies), Section A, Long Term Leases, Line 21, Column 3 and 4, because a source was not presented in the column ï¿½Agency Source Dataï¿½.  
16. The FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule column titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Data,ï¿½ presented in Attachment 5, must be arithmetically correct.  The FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule column titled ï¿½Variance,ï¿½ presented in Attachment 5, must be arithmetically correct.  We totaled footnote totals within the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule column titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Data.ï¿½  We totaled footnote totals and cross-totaled the line items in the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule column titled ï¿½Variance.ï¿½
Findings:  The calculated amounts agreed to the footnote totals within the ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Dataï¿½ column or to the line items in the ï¿½Varianceï¿½ column on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule.
17. Any differences between the amounts for each respective line item on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule for the Departmentï¿½s consolidated financial statement footnotes, or other supporting data, and the corresponding amounts on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule column titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Data,ï¿½ presented in Attachment 5, must be identified and explained by the CFO.  We inspected Attachment 5 for any differences between the amounts for each respective line item on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule for the Departmentï¿½s consolidated financial statement footnotes, or other supporting data, and the corresponding amounts on the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule column titled ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Data,ï¿½ and requested explanations and supporting documentation for those variances from the CFO.  
Findings:  No variances were identified between the amounts in the FACTS I NOTES Review Schedule columns titled ï¿½Amounts from FACTS I NOTE Report Dataï¿½ and ï¿½Amount from Agency Source Dataï¿½ presented in Attachment 5.

1 Where applicable, the procedures performed took into consideration that the consolidated financial statements and footnotes were rounded to the nearest thousand.
	2

	Exhibit A
U.S. Department of the Interior
Agreed-upon Procedures for
FACTS I Data Verification